March 4, 2011

Cass Sunstein, a friend of President Barack Obama from their faculty days at the University of Chicago law school, and who has been writing about group polarization since the 1990s, was appointed Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama Administration in January 2009. It is interesting to note that he is author of 'Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide', copyright 2009. In this book, Sunstein says: "When people find themselves in groups of like-minded types, they are especially likely to move to extremes. And when such groups include authorities who tell group members what to do, or who put them into certain social roles, very bad things can happen. This is a general fact of social life: Much of the time, groups of people end up thinking and doing things that group members would never think or do on their own. When people talk together, what happens? Do group members compromise? Do they move toward the middle of the tendencies of their individual members? The answer is now clear, and it is not what intuition would suggest: Groups go to extremes. More precisely, members of a deliberating group usually end up at a more extreme position in the same general direction as their inclinations before deliberation began. This is the phenomenon known as group polarization."

What bothers me most is the willingness of some Americans to slap on a government badge and forget who they are and where they come from. I suppose it shouldn’t be a surprise that so many are willing accomplices in the government-sponsored terrorism that is eating away at the core of our country. History is full of these cowards who will do anything to save themselves even if it means harming you. What better place for a coward to hide than behind a government badge? - Marti Oakley, Homeland Security: Government-sponsored Unique “Terrorism”, The PPJ Gazette, April 20, 2011

If ever there was an indicator of just how apathetic and well trained the American public truly is, it must be this situation with TSA. Like a herd of bedraggled sheep, thousands of you forfeited your 4th and 5th amendment rights and allowed the government to irradiate you and view your virtually naked body, or allowed yourself to be subjected to an enhanced pat-down…nothing short of a sexual encounter. And for what? This is a training and conditioning exercise you fools! This has nothing to do with making us safer, national security or protecting America. It has nothing to do with making your flight safer. It has everything to do with conditioning you to accept a full body assault as long as the persons doing it are wearing a government badge. You are being trained to submit and comply. - Marti Oakley, Such a Well Behaved Herd of Sheep: TSA thanks you for allowing them to violate your rights and to assault you, PPJ Gazette, November 24, 2010

In previous opinions we’ve discussed the possibility of US law enforcement and military assets being deployed to Main Street at the onset of any major crisis. As we’ve seen in the middle east over the last several weeks, and are seeing in real time in Libya today, once military is deployed things can spiral out of control very quickly. Zero Hedge contributor Cognitive Dissonance asks 'Would US Police/Troops Fire Upon US Citizens?': "The short answer is that of course they will. Why would you think otherwise when US history offers up dozens of examples to choose from. The powers that be are ego maniacs, the elites have hundreds of years of experience controlling the masses, and the masses are mostly living their lives in denial. I consider it inevitable that when the uprisings begin, and they turn really ugly, that those who are paid to protect the powerful and their assets will follow orders and do precisely that." - Mac Slavo, Of Course They Will (Fire on U.S. Citizens), SHTFPlan.com, March 4, 2011

Groupthink is a type of thought within a deeply cohesive in-group whose members try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. It is a second potential negative consequence of group cohesion.

Cults are studied by sociologists in regard to groupthink and its deindividuation effects. The textbook definition describes deindividuation as the loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension, which occurs in group situations that foster anonymity and draw attention away from the individual.

Ever since the holocaust, psychologists have been intrigued by our obedience to authority figures. In one of the most infamous experiments, a completely demented and absolutely brilliant Stanley Milgram tested participants’ willingness to obey an authority figure who told them to administer dangerous shocks to another subject. Shockingly, 65% of the participants administered the highest voltage — even after the subject complained about having a heart condition!

It’s amazing what we’ll do when a stern guy in a lab coat tells us to, but what does this have to do with you? Everything. Thought leaders and experts can inspire and provide solutions, but if you follow them blindly, you can do yourself harm. Similar to the work I’ve done on the dangers of groupthink and social networking, here are a few questions on how to get the most from experts without losing yourself in the process:

What’s the downside? This should always be question #1. What’s the worst thing that could happen? Make sure you are clear on this before you do anything.

Does this make sense? You don’t have to be an expert to have common sense. If you get advice or are asked to do something, step back and ask yourself if it makes sense.

Why shouldn’t I do this? All signs point to yes, but can you think of any reason why you shouldn’t take the expert’s advice? If you are experiencing cognitive dissonance, you may not want to question what you’re doing, but it’s at this point where you need to the most.

What harm could come if I don’t do this? Will the world end? Will you lose a limb? Sometimes we build things up in our head to where we feel intense pressure to do something, but this question is great for deflating things and for putting the situation back into perspective.

What would happen if I waited? Really bad decisions are often made without much thought or reflection. Take a step back. Give yourself some time before you commit to anything.

In your quest to find answers and guidance, be careful not to blindly follow experts and authority figures. Make sure you ask yourself these five questions before you act. Trust me, I’m an expert…

According to Irving Janis, decision making groups are not necessarily destined to groupthink. He devised seven ways of preventing groupthink:

Leaders should assign each member the role of “critical evaluator”. This allows each member to freely air objections and doubts.

Higher-ups should not express an opinion when assigning a task to a group.

The organization should set up several independent groups, working on the same problem.

All effective alternatives should be examined.

Each member should discuss the group's ideas with trusted people outside of the group.

The group should invite outside experts into meetings. Group members should be allowed to discuss with and question the outside experts.

At least one group member should be assigned the role of Devil's advocate. This should be a different person for each meeting.

By following these guidelines, groupthink can be avoided. After the Bay of Pigs invasion fiasco, President John F. Kennedy sought to avoid groupthink during the Cuban Missile Crisis. During meetings, he invited outside experts to share their viewpoints, and allowed group members to question them carefully. He also encouraged group members to discuss possible solutions with trusted members within their separate departments, and he even divided the group up into various sub-groups, to partially break the group cohesion. Kennedy was deliberately absent from the meetings, so as to avoid pressing his own opinion.

“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.” - German, Hermann Goering, a Nazi leader and high-ranking general during World War II, stated at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials

New ScientistJune 16, 2009

Hitler and Mussolini both had the ability to bend millions of people to their fascist will. Now evidence from psychology and neurology is emerging to explain how tactics like organised marching and propaganda can work to exert mass mind control.

Scott Wiltermuth of Stanford University in California and colleagues have found that activities performed in unison, such as marching or dancing, increase loyalty to the group.

“It makes us feel as though we’re part of a larger entity, so we see the group’s welfare as being as important as our own,” he says.

Wiltermuth’s team separated 96 people into four groups who performed these tasks together: listening to a song while silently mouthing the words, singing along, singing and dancing, or listening to different versions of the song so that they sang and danced out of sync. In a later game, when asked to decide whether to stick with the group or strive for personal gain, those in the non-synchronised group behaved less loyally than the rest (Psychological Science, vol 20, p 1).

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville thinks this research helps explain why fascist leaders, amongst others, use organised marching and chanting to whip crowds into a frenzy of devotion to their cause, though these tactics can be used just as well for peace, he stresses. Community dances and group singing can ease local tension, for example – a theory he plans to test experimentally (Journal of Legal Studies, DOI: 10.1086/529447).

Meanwhile, the powerful unifying effects of propaganda images are being explored by Charles Seger at Indiana University at Bloomington. His team primed students with pictures of their university – college sweatshirts or the buildings themselves – then asked how highly they scored on different emotions, such as pride or happiness. The primed students gave a strikingly similar emotional profile, in contrast with non-primed students (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.004).

Interest in the idea of a herd mentality has been renewed by work into mirror neurons – cells that fire when we perform an action or watch someone perform a similar action.It suggests that our brains are geared to mimic our peers.

“We are set up for ‘auto-copy’,” says Haidt.

Neurological evidence seems to back this idea. Vasily Klucharev, at the Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, found that thebrain releases more of the reward chemical dopamine when we fall in line with the group consensus (Neuron, vol 61, p 140). His team asked 24 women to rate more than 200 women for attractiveness. If a participant discovered their ratings did not tally with that of the others, they tended to readjust their scores. When a woman realised her differing opinion, fMRI scans revealed that her brain generated what the team dubbed an “error signal”. This has a conditioning effect, says Klucharev: it’s how we learn to follow the crowd.

'Every day brings this nation closer to Nazi-style totalitarian abyss'

The fuel that fired the Nazi's actions was a a herd mentality.

WorldNetDailyNovember 13, 2008

Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism,warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth in a new book.

"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes Hilmar von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."

Von Campe has founded the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – a key, he believes, to keeping America free.

"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."

Von Campe grew up under the Nazis, served in the Hitler Youth and fought against the Red Army in the Yugoslavian theater as a tank gunner in the German army. He was captured at the end of the war and escaped five months later from a prisoner of war camp in Communist Yugoslavia.

"It took me a long time to understand and define the nature of National Socialism," says von Campe. "And, unfortunately, their philosophy continues to flourish under different labels remaining a menace to America and free human society."

He writes:

"The most painful part of defining National Socialism was to recognize my own moral responsibility for the Nazi disaster and their crimes against humanity. It boiled down to accepting the truth that 'as I am, so is my nation,' and realizing that if every German was like me, it was no wonder that the nation became a cesspool of gangsters. This realization is as valid today for any person in any nation as it was then, and it is true for America and every American now."

Von Campe's message is that political freedom and democratic rules alone are not sufficient to govern humanity justly.

"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse.This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."

Von Campe says he sees spiritual parallels among Americans and his childhood Germany.

"The silence from our pulpits regarding the moral collapse of American society from within is not very different from the silence that echoed from the pulpits in Germany toward Nazi policies," he explains. "Our family lived through the Nazi years in Germany, an experience typical of millions of Europeans regardless of what side they were on. We paid a high price for the moral perversions of a German government, which excluded God and His Commandments from their policies.America must not continue following the same path to destruction, but instead heed the lessons of history and the warning I am giving."

Specifically, von Campe warns Americans their political leaders are on the wrong footing, "denying our cultural and traditional roots based on our unique Constitution and Christian orientation as a nation. Christians don't understand their mission."

The Movie, Das Experiment (2002), Based on a 1971 Stanford University Prison Experiment

Inspired by a famous 1971 psychological experiment, "Stanford Prison Experiment," Oliver Hirschbiegel's German-language movie Das Experiment finds a group of 20 volunteers randomly divided into 12 prisoners and eight guards and asked to play out their roles for a fortnight while scientists study their reactions.

Take a group of 20 average men, split them into two sub-groups, and give one sub-group ("guards") all of the power and authority, while stripping the others ("inmates") of all rights and dignity. Now, tell these men that this is simply an experiment. Keep them in a mock-prison setting for two weeks and see what happens. Needless to say, the "guards" take advantage, soon becoming merciless overlords, and the "convicts" are reduced to objects of humiliation and degradation. This leads to a conclusion that shatters both mind and body of all involved, including the observing scientists! THE EXPERIMENT is a slice of psychological horror that delivers a drop-kick of profound insight into (in) human nature. Cold, claustrophobic, and effective. Highly recommended. - Bindy Sue Frønkünschtein, Movie Review, Amazon.com

The film is based on the book "Black Box" by Mario Giordano, which is based on the psychological experiment conducted by Stanford University.

Americans given power by the government to be overlords will have no problem using force against other Americans. Foreign troops and paid mercenaries could be brought in to assist in expanding the police state and enforcing marital law.

Points and FiguresNovember 27, 2010

Interesting video. Where is the line between good and evil? It seems to me that governments can cross that line far easier than individuals. Communism has killed millions. Nazi’s and Fascists have executed millions. The Spanish Inquisition. The Romans executed millions. The tyranny of government has been a constant throughout the ages.

There are some graphic images of the Abu Gharib prison in it. I don’t mean to demean the American soldier, because I believe that Americans have done more to further the cause of freedom than any other soldier from any other country in the history of mankind. It is a recent example of group think that can be illustrated.

Milgrom’s experiment post Holocaust is pretty compelling. He conducted it in the 1950′s. It is taught in business school to illustrate what happens with groupthink. Groupthink is a very interesting psychological phenomena.

In the old catholic church, they recognized groupthink could happen. The cardinals appointed one priest to be the “devil’s advocate” that openly disagreed with the Pope.

Bear what the TSA is doing these days and think about this video. Repression and violation of human rights starts with a small logical step. My guess is there is a lot of groupthink going on in the halls of the TSA. I also saw a lot of groupthink in the Bush administration, and see it in the Obama administration.

Groupthink also explains why frat boys do some really stupid stuff. After engaging in debauchery, they must look back and think, “Who thought that was a good idea?”.

Professor Ron Burt has done some pretty neat stuff applying this to the business world. In business, torture of people doesn’t occur. But screwing up business plans and not meeting the needs of your customers does happen. In a business case, the business loses money or goes under. When it’s big government, they can’t go out of business.

If ever there was an indicator of just how apathetic and well trained the American public truly is, it must be this situation with TSA. Like a herd of bedraggled sheep, thousands of you forfeited your 4th and 5th amendment rights and allowed the government to irradiate you and view your virtually naked body, or allowed yourself to be subjected to an enhanced pat-down…nothing short of a sexual encounter. And for what? This is a training and conditioning exercise you fools! This has nothing to do with making us safer, national security or protecting America. It has nothing to do with making your flight safer. It has everything to do with conditioning you to accept a full body assault as long as the persons doing it are wearing a government badge. You are being trained to submit and comply. - Marti Oakley , Such a Well Behaved Herd of Sheep: TSA thanks you for allowing them to violate your rights and to assault you, PPJ Gazette, November 24, 2010

The TSA is not looking for terrorists. This is the police state. They want to get you used to being stopped, searched and violated. Now they are moving into our schools so ourkids will think it's o.k. to be searched all the time.

The priority isn't safety but intimidation and indoctrination. This is just another of those small steps taken toward the police state. And don't look at this as a liberal vs. conservative issue, because it really is an issue of freedom vs. tyranny.

The National Security State finally reaches down to the level of a senior prom. What used to be a fun rite-of-passage is now a counter-terrorism exercise involving the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Advice to teenagers: find something else to do before they start water-boarding you.

KOB Eyewitness News 4May 20, 2011

Saturday night, a certified TSA official will be at the Santa Fe High School prom to oversee student searches.

This all comes after two Capital High School students, sisters, filed a lawsuit saying they were groped by a security agent at Capital High School's prom last month. On Friday,the court ordered Santa Fe Public Schools and the security company ASI to provide at least one TSA certified person at the Santa Fe High School prom and the Capital High School graduation.

The restraining order also spells out the specific ways security can perform searches. It says a pat-down is only to be used if there are reasonable grounds and that pat-downs should not be used as a first approach for every student.

KOB Eyewitness News 4 talked to one of the sisters suing the district earlier this week. Candice Herrera said,

"She grabbed my breast and shook the inner part of my bra and shook it and then picked up the front of my dress to mid thigh and she was patting down my bare legs."

Capital's Principal told us she was standing right there when students were searched and doesn't remember any students complaining about the pat downs.

This is so mind boggling to me! I am still trying to figure out within WHAT law or right would the TSA have to pat down people AFTER they got OFF a train in Savannah, Ga.?

Where is the sense in patting down people when they have gotten to their destination?

But, more importantly what RIGHT OR LAW allows TSA to pat down people riding on trains?

If all of this is true, then we are so down the rabbit hole in being a POLICE STATE in the United States!All of this invasion of privacy and having to SUBMIT to other people feeling us up all in the name of keeping us "safe from terrorism"?

It seems to me there is one terrorist that is standing above all others now! After watching this, I believe those who are reading these words know exactly who/what I am claiming is a terrorist!

If that had been me, I would have demanded what right they had to do ANY pat down and REFUSED to allow it being done to me or my child!

I believe as many people as possible need to reproduce this video, in case youtube decides to take it down.

Cell-phone footage of a hysterical three-year-old girl being frisked by a TSA security worker at a Tennessee airport has sparked outrage since it was posted on the Internet this week and reported on by several mainstream media outlets.

Thing is, the video, which was shot by the girl's father -- a reporter for a Houston TV station -- is more than two years old.

Mandy's father, Steve Simon of The CW39 News, aired the grainy, 17-second clip for a first-person report in March 2008 to make a point about how TSA personnel need to be better trained to handle different kinds of passengers.

But the video resurfaced this week at an unfortunate time for the TSA, when many air travelers are in open revolt over such airport security issues as intrusive pat-downs and the use of potentially embarrassing X-ray scanning machines that can see through clothing.

The public's anger against TSA security policies has especially intensified in recent days after a San Diego man recorded his refusal to be searched by TSA employees or pass through a full-body scanner. TSA chief John Pistole also spent the past two days defending the agency before the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

Regarding the video (below), TSA spokesman Jon Allen told the Chattanooga Times Free Press this week that "TSA officers are trained to work with parents to ensure a respectful screening process for the entire family while providing the best possible security for all travelers.

"We reviewed the circumstances surrounding the screening of this family at the time and determined that procedures in place then were followed," wrote Allen.

The incident happened at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport after Mandy, carrying a Teddy bear, set off an alarm -- twice -- as she passed throught the metal detector.

Once security took the bear away from her to pass it through an X-ray screening device, the little girl started crying - and it only got worse when the TSA agent started patting her down.

"When that alarm goes off twice, everyone -- no matter how old, must be hand-searched," said Simon in his report.

"But did it have to be like this? Is there a better way?" he added. "In my opinion, that TSA employee did not know how to communicate."

In the report, Simon interviewed TSA regional security director James Marchand, who agreed that measures should have been taken to make the child more comfortable.

"You try to make it as best you can for that child to come through. If you can come up with some kind of a game to play with a child, it makes it a lot easier," said Marchand, promising to make it part of TSA training.

The old video started a new stream of angry comments after being posted on YouTube this week - where footage of the news report was titled "TSA Molests 3 Year Old Child at Chattanooga Metro Airport."

“The female officer ran her hand up the inside of my leg to my groin and she did it so hard and so rough she lifted me off my heels,” she says. “I think I yelped. I was in pain for about an hour afterwards. It just felt excessive and unnecessary.”

You may have also heard about the cancer survivor who, due to an “enhanced” TSA pat-down breaking the seal on his urastomy bag, was left humiliated, in tears, and covered in his own urine.

Now, meet a little boy who was randomly selected for an “enhanced” screening by The Sexual Assaulters the TSA.

According to the person who posted this video, the child apparently was uncomfortable with having strangers pat him down. [Who could blame him?]

Before the video started, the boy went through a metal detector and didn’t set it off but was selected for a pat down. The boy was shy so the TSA couldn’t complete the full pat on the young boy. The father tried several times to just hold the boys arms out for the TSA agent, but I guess it didn’t end up being enough for the guy. I was about 30 feet away, so I couldn’t hear their conversation, if there was any. The enraged father pulled his son's shirt off and gave it to the TSA agent to search; that's when this video begins.

So, sexual assault, humiliation, and pedophilia are preferable to Janet Napolitano, John Pistole, and Barack Obama, than having the courage to profile actual would-be terrorists?

We teach our children not to let anyone touch them in inappropriate ways, yet this is exactly what the TSA is doing. The government is conditioning our children to submit to government authority without questioning the loss of liberty under the paramilitary police state of America in the 21st century.

RedState.comNovember 22, 2010

On September 11, 2001, 19 men killed nearly 3,000 innocent men, women and children. All of the killers were of Middle Eastern descent and in their 20s.

Not having been born on September 11th, this little boy is undoubtedly too young to know of the death and despair that occurred on that day.

He is still probably too young to learn about it even now.

He is not, however, too young to learn what it is like to be molested at the hands of his government [via Fox31].

Although this young man is neither of Middle Eastern descent, nor is he in his teens or early 20s, he apparently does fit the profile of an average American terrorist, according to Janet Napolitano.

For those frequently sentenced to commercial air travel, few things are less welcome than the following thought:

The taxpayer-fed Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at the airport security checkpoint could be a petty thief or a sexual deviant. And the odds are pretty good that the typical batch of TSA chair-moisteners includes at least one or the other. This makes things quite uncomfortable as TSA screeners paw through one's luggage or conduct invasive personal security inspections.

TSA is a large organization with a large workforce, [and] unfortunately we have an individual who does things that are truly inappropriate, things that are intolerable for TSA,” stated Doug Melvin, Federal Security Director for Idaho.

Melvin insisted that the TSA had a “zero tolerance” policy for behavior of this type. He didn't explain how a suspected pederast with five aliases and sets of personal ID could pass a federal background check.Less than a year after Harrison's arrest, Mr. Melvin has been forced to resign as a result of his own public sexual misconduct.

“Doug Melvin was busted after staff and hotel guests say they saw him walking around naked.”

The police report on the incident recorded that,

“Melvin entered the swimming area and removed his clothing before walking around, exposing himself.... Melvin was also reportedly masturbating while in front of the windows directly in view of the main elevator.”

Frankie "The Fig" Figueroa

This last bit of behavior resembles the conduct of Frank Figueroa, Melvin's former comrade in the Homeland Security Department. Figueroa, a former high-ranking official in the DHS's Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division, was head of “Operation Predator,” a nation-wide crackdown on child sex offenders. Thus there was some kind of bizarre symmetry at work when Figueroa was arrested by Tampa police in late 2005 after he exposed and, ah, manipulated himself in the presence of a 16-year-old girl.

As I've said before: Once is an anomaly, twice a coincidence, but three or more instances constitute a pattern.

The problem, of course, is not that there's a small number of perverts scattered through the DHS's personnel pool like a handful of raisins in several gallons of rice pudding. The deeper cause for concern is the culture of impunity that characterizes that elephantine bureaucracy – a sense that those who work therein are made of holier, more refined stuff than the hoi polloi.

One perfectly suitable example of this attitude can be found in the fact that the highest commendation for ethics that TSA can bestow is the “John W. Magaw Values Award.”

Who was John W. Magaw,” you ask, your brows embracing in puzzled non-recognition?

Magaw was the first director of the TSA, appointed to that gig in late 2001 after a less-than-laudable stint as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). The fact that TSA named an award after a living, recently retired head of the agency is a nauseating bit of Soviet-esque sycophancy. More troubling in this specific case is Magaw's own behavior, which apparently typifies the “values” the TSA is supposed to embrace.

Magaw was head of the Secret Service's presidential detail in 1993 when Bill Clinton appointed him to head the scandal-plagued ATF following the Waco massacre. For six years, until his lateral move to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1999, Magaw did his best to delay, divert, distract, misdirect, and otherwise obstruct efforts to expose the ATF's misbehavior in the events leading up to the atrocities at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

Magaw also successfully dissipated public and congressional outrage over the 1995 revelations of the ATF's annual “Good Old Boys Roundup,” an event that “included racist signs and slogans and skits that included simulated sex acts and torture between white and black-faced participants,” as one account summarizes. Although sponsored by the ATF, this event – sort of an annual dress rehearsal for Abu Ghraib – reportedly included participants from the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, the Secret Service, US Marshals Service, and other federal agencies. Apart from one congressional hearing in July 1995, nothing of any consequence was done about the “Roundup” events.

During a 1995 Senate hearing into the slaughter at Ruby Ridge, Magaw adamantly defended the ATF informant who – according to a 1993 court verdict in Idaho – had entrapped Randy Weaver as part of a scheme to blackmail him into becoming a federal informant. Magaw insisted, once again despite vedicts to the contrary -- that the behavior of ATF officials in the Weaver case “was lawful and proper in every respect."

"Do you believe Randy Weaver--or do you believe the federal agents who have sworn to tell the truth and are carrying out a career in this government?"

Therein lies the true perversity at the heart of the regime Magaw served so dutifully: The conceit that those in the State's employ are innately superior to, and deserve dominion over, the “mundanes” who are not agents of the Leviathan. As one of Magaw's Soviet soul-mates put it,

“To us, everything is permitted....”

This would apparently include public acts of sexual degeneracy and predation by agents of the Homeland Security apparatus, as long as those committing them aren't caught. Doug “Flash” Melvin and his erstwhile TSA comrades insist, his sudden resignation from the agency for “personal” reasons has nothing to do with his sexual exhibitionism.

(If you're interested in the previous three installments in the "Perverts With Power" series, look here, here, and here.)

Last Thursday, without much fanfare, TSA announced that it would start a new screening procedure that would include more pat-down searches nationwide. USA Today reports that in the new procedures, screeners' hands would slide over a passenger's body, requiring screeners to touch passengers' breasts and genitals. In addition to questions over whether this change is necessary or effective, another question that many passengers may have in the backs of their minds is whether the TSA screeners have a criminal background that should preclude them from such sensitive duties.

Possible reasons for the new procedures

There is some debate over whether these procedures are either useful or necessary. There are certainly threats to airliners from bombs that could be carried on a person's body, such as the bomb used in the unsuccessful bombing attempt on a Delta airliner last December. However, it is not at all clear that this new pat-down procedure would have found that explosive device.

The more recent incident involving two bombs sent as cargo from Yemen to the US could indicate renewed efforts to target US airliners. However, there has been no public acknowledgement by the TSA, the US government, or any other government that there is any increased threat to air travel from bombs hidden beneath clothing. Certainly the new pat-down procedure is a very public and very noticeable increase in security, but not one that is directly linked to any immediate threat.

TSA employees with faulty criminal background checks

The TSA serves a very important and vital role in airline security, and all of their employees are required to pass security and background checks. However, those checks in the past have been less than thorough. For example, in 2004, the Department of Homeland Security (which includes TSA) released a report that stated that TSA had allowed some screeners to perform their duties before their criminal background checks were complete, and allowed others to continue working while problems with their background checks were resolved. Even if this problem no longer exists for current applicants and employees, a more serious problem may be that the current system of background checks may have allowed those convicted of rape and other sexually based offenses to join TSA.

Are current TSA background checks too limited?

The 2004 DHS report stated that federal regulations (49 CFR. § 1542.209) specified were 28 kinds of felony convictions that would have disqualified an applicant for a TSA screener position, including rapes or crimes involving aggravated sexual abuse, but only if those convictions had occurred in the previous 10 years. It implies that a person convicted of rape, attempted, child molestation, or similar crimes may not be required to report such convictions during their background check and may be allowed to perform pat-down searches on passengers.

It is unclear if TSA has changed its background check requirements since 2004 to exclude any convicted sex offenders from working directly with passengers. However, the fact that in the past it may have been possible that someone with that kind of criminal past may be a TSA screener may concern most passengers.

Are convicted rapists performing pat-down searches?

The full details of the the TSA's process for reviewing current and potential employees is not available to the public. Whatever those procedures are, a reasonable passenger would agree that anyone who has been found guilty of any crime that involves rape or some similar criminal act should not be allowed to search passengers. If the TSA could publicly address the following questions, it may go a long way toward reducing the public's concern over the new pat-down procedures:

Are there any current TSA employees who are convicted sex offenders (either for a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult of juvenile), even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?

If the answer to the first question is yes, are any of these employees acting as security screeners who have have to have direct physical contact with the flying public?

If the answer to the first question is no, have all TSA employees, as part of their background check, been asked if they have been convicted of rape or some other sexually based crime, whether it were a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult or as a juvenile, even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?

If the first question can't be answered for a TSA employee because of inadequate information, would this employee be restricted from working in a position that involves direct physical contact with the flying public?

Are TSA security screeners who are convicted of rape or another sexually based crime, no matter how minor, immediately removed from any position where they may have physical contact with the traveling public?

Unless the TSA is both willing and able to answer these and similar questions, the average traveler may be very reluctant to submit to invasive searches where TSA security officers have to physically touch them in sensitive areas, making it more difficult for the TSA to accomplish its security mission.

What to do if searched

While searching passengers, including pat down searches of breasts and genital areas, may be necessary for security purposes, it would be considered very intrusive by most passengers. If you are selected for this kind of search, you should insist that it be done in a dignified manner. It should be done in a screened off area so that you can't be viewed by others in the vicinity, and the TSA representative should act in a professional manner.

Dealing with abuses

If you feel that you were not treated with dignity or respect during a pat down search, you should take appropriate actions such as calling attention to anything that you think is unnecessary or having a TSA supervisor or law enforcement official present. You can also file a complaint with the TSA, with the AirSafe.com complaint process, or with an organization like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU has noted several types of common abuses:

Unnecessary groping of passengers’ breast or genital areas

Humiliating experiences including for disabled or transgendered passengers

Lack of privacy during pat-downs

Lack of respect for religious requirements.

If you feel that you have not been treated in a fair and professional matter, you can contact the ACLU and provide them with details about your experience.

“A Review of Background Checks for Federal Passenger and Baggage Screeners at Airports”http://www.airsafe.com/issues/security/OIG_TSA_report_full.pdfBetween February 2002 and December 2002, TSA reviewed an estimated 1.7 million applications to hire 55,600 new federal appointees, successfully meeting congressionally mandated deadlines of November 19 and December 31, 2002, for replacing commercial passenger and baggage screeners, respectively. However, reports surfaced soon afterward that the background checks for screeners, which ATSA requires, were incomplete and possibly flawed. In response to these reports, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) initiated this review of screener background checks.

The video which has now gone viral on the internet shows the girl being touched and patted down all over her body including her chest, inside her waistband, her legs, and arms. The TSA agent doing it is seen performing the search in front of the child's mother.

After watching the video Trish Stebbin a mother of a 6-year-old said,

"I would never let my child go through customs and let them do that to her...never!"

The video has outraged so many that the Americans for Civil Liberties Union is now involved in the debate over whether the screener went to far. Louisiana ACLU Executive Director, Marjorie Esman said,

"A child who was audibly complaining I don't want to do this should have at the very least been given some privacy."

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced today it will begin recruiting more than 1,300 part-time federal security screeners at 30 airports. Over the next few days, TSA will post job announcements at www.tsa.gov for positions at select airports in several cities including New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Denver, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Raleigh, New Orleans, Seattle, and Anchorage.

The addition of part-time screeners is a part of TSA's rightsizing plan and will produce the flexibility needed to optimize the scheduling process so the workforce can be applied to the workload, with special attention to the periods of peak passenger throughput.

"Once on the job these new part-time screeners will help air travelers by ensuring that checkpoint lanes are open during peak times and helping to keep wait times to a minimum," said Adm. James M. Loy, Administrator of TSA.

TSA is on track to right-size its workforce, moving to a mix of full and part-time screeners positions.

Transportation security screeners' duties include providing frontline security and protection of travelers, airports and airplanes by identifying dangerous objects in baggage and on passengers. Their job is to prevent those objects from being transported onto aircraft by utilizing diverse, cutting edge electronic detection and imaging equipment, as well as using the lessons learned from a concentrated training curriculum.

Part-time security salaries will depend upon a screener's work schedule. Hourly wages can range from $11.30 to $16.96 depending upon experience, plus locality pay depending upon the location of the airport. For example, hourly wages for part-time screeners in New York City can range from $13.21 - $19.82 a hour depending upon experience. Part-time security screeners also are eligible for federal benefits including health insurance, life insurance, retirement, paid annual (vacation) and sick leave. The amount of the premium paid for both health and life insurance and retirement as well as accrued annual (vacation) and sick leave are based upon the work schedule.

The recruiting of potential candidates is the first step in the deployment of federal screeners. Candidates need to apply on-line and must meet the minimum requirements under the law. Candidates are then assessed, hired, and required to successfully complete 44 hours of classroom instruction and 60 hours of on-the-job training. The entire process takes several weeks.

All candidates by law must meet the following minimum requirements:

U.S. citizenship or U.S. national;

High school diploma, GED or equivalent, or one year of security or aviation screening experience;

Philly.co - A passenger screener at Philadelphia International Airport is facing charges that he distributed more than 100 images of child pornography via Facebook, records show.

Federal agents also allege that Transportation Safety Administration Officer Thomas Gordon Jr. of Philadelphia, who routinely searched airline passengers, uploaded explicit pictures of young girls to an Internet site on which he also posted a photograph of himself in his TSA uniform.

Homeland Security agents arrested the TSA officer March 24, and he is being held without bail.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced today it will begin recruiting more than 1,300 part-time federal security screeners at 30 airports. Over the next few days, TSA will post job announcements at www.tsa.gov for positions at select airports in several cities including New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Denver, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Raleigh, New Orleans, Seattle, and Anchorage.

The addition of part-time screeners is a part of TSA's rightsizing plan and will produce the flexibility needed to optimize the scheduling process so the workforce can be applied to the workload, with special attention to the periods of peak passenger throughput.

"Once on the job these new part-time screeners will help air travelers by ensuring that checkpoint lanes are open during peak times and helping to keep wait times to a minimum," said Adm. James M. Loy, Administrator of TSA.

TSA is on track to right-size its workforce, moving to a mix of full and part-time screeners positions.

Transportation security screeners' duties include providing frontline security and protection of travelers, airports and airplanes by identifying dangerous objects in baggage and on passengers. Their job is to prevent those objects from being transported onto aircraft by utilizing diverse, cutting edge electronic detection and imaging equipment, as well as using the lessons learned from a concentrated training curriculum.

TSA will recruit part-time screeners at [various] airports. Part-time security salaries will depend upon a screener's work schedule. Hourly wages can range from $11.30 to $16.96 depending upon experience, plus locality pay depending upon the location of the airport. For example, hourly wages for part-time screeners in New York City can range from $13.21 - $19.82 a hour depending upon experience. Part-time security screeners also are eligible for federal benefits including health insurance, life insurance, retirement, paid annual (vacation) and sick leave. The amount of the premium paid for both health and life insurance and retirement as well as accrued annual (vacation) and sick leave are based upon the work schedule.

The recruiting of potential candidates is the first step in the deployment of federal screeners. Candidates need to apply on-line and must meet the minimum requirements under the law. Candidates are then assessed, hired, and required to successfully complete 44 hours of classroom instruction and 60 hours of on-the-job training. The entire process takes several weeks.

All candidates by law must meet the following minimum requirements:

U.S. citizenship or U.S. national;

High school diploma, GED or equivalent, or one year of security or aviation screening experience;

The Transportation Security Administration expects to hire hundreds or even thousands of screeners this spring in order to cover shortfalls in several airports across the U.S. If you want to apply for a job as a TSA screener, you need to read this.

The TSA is changing its hiring process for screeners and other staff so that officials at each airport are responsible for hiring decisions, rather than the previous system where hiring was contracted out to a separate company. Officials hope that this process will eventually improve the hiring process, but for now it’s resulted in understaffing at many airports, as many aren’t yet ready to process applicants.

“It’s a concern with the summer coming that they will be staffed as needed,” Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, told the Wall Street Journal.

TSA hopes that shifting responsibility to federal security directors at each airport “will help with quality and improve retention,” TSA head Kip Hawley told Congress on April 7.

One of the airports officials say desperately needs more screeners is Los Angeles International Airport. And if you can’t get to the airport to apply for the job, yes, you can apply online.

Another airport needing screeners is Kahului Airport in Kahului, on the island of Maui in Hawai’i. Yes, you can not only get a government job, you can also live in Hawai’i while doing it.

If you’d like to apply to be a TSA screener at your nearest airport — or a faraway airport — and spend your days being resented for strip searching people’s wheelchair-bound grandmothers, you can apply online or call 1 (800) 887-1895.

We are unique among our fellow Federal employees because we do not use the standard GS grading system you may be familiar with. We use an "SV" grading system, which is a system of discrete grades with pay ranges that differ from GS pay ranges. These discrete grades, which are identified by letters rather than numbers, have minimum and maximum rates.

In the table below, we show the ranges for each pay band.

TSA Pay Scale (2010)Band

Minimum

Maximum

A

$17,083

$24,977

B

$19,570

$28,546

C

$22,167

$33,303

D

$25,518

$38,277

E

$29,302

$44,007

F

$33,627

$50,494

G

$39,358

$60,982

H

$48,007

$74,390

I

$58,495

$90,717

J

$71,364

$110,612

K

$85,311

$132,237

L

$101,962

$155,500

M

$120,236

$155,500

The above rates are basic pay rates and do not include locality pay. 2010 basic pay rates are limited to $155,500. 2010 adjusted pay rates (base pay plus locality) are limited to $172,550.

As parents of young children prepare to join the throngs at the nation’s airports on the upcoming Mother of All Travel Days, there’s a new complication. In addition to remembering to pack snacks and toys and diapers, worrying about changing those diapers on a plane with no table in the restroom, and averting the glares of other travelers as your own toddler melts down, now there is another potential obstacle between you and your turkey — the new T.S.A. screening procedures.

What to tell your child about the possibility of a great big machine that can see through his clothes? Or a lady in uniform who might want to pat places that are private?

As it happens, the T.S.A. has a page on its Web site that addresses traveling with children. It makes no mention at all of the new procedures. It does, however, offer practical advice such as “NEVER leave babies in an infant carrier while it goes through the X-ray machine.”

And it assures parents that:

We will not ask you to do anything that will separate you from your child or children.

We specially train our Security Officers and they understand your concern for your children. They will approach your children gently and treat them with respect. If your child becomes uncomfortable or upset, security officers will consult you about the best way to relieve your child’s concern.

More detailed is the page about holiday travel. In addition to the helpful warning that containers of cranberry sauce and gravy will be counted as “liquids,” there is a description of the new “advanced imaging technology” and of the pat downs that result when a passenger either refuses to go through the new machines or is selected for further screening by the T.S.A. staff.

It is possible that your children can not go through the machine in the first place. Only individuals who can follow directions and stand still with their arms raised for several seconds can be screened in this way, the Web site says. Which rules out many young children.

If your children can use the machine, they must go alone, you may not walk with them. Best advice at this stage is to remove EVERYTHING from their pockets — not just metal items, as was the case with the earlier metal-detecting versions. News reports indicate that many a pat down has been triggered by clumps of lint.

If your children can not use the machine, or if you choose not to allow them to, or if a post-machine pat down is ordered, here’s what the Web site has to say on how that might work:

What do I do during a pat-down?All passengers have important rights during a pat-down. You have the right to request the pat-down be conducted in a private room and you have the right to have the pat-down witnessed by a person of your choice. All pat-downs are only conducted by same-gender officers. The officer will explain the pat-down process before and during the pat-down. If you have a medical device, please inform the officer.

Will children receive pat-downs?Transportation Security Officers will work with parents to resolve any alarms at the checkpoint. If required, a child may receive a modified pat-down. Parents are encouraged to ensure their children have taken all items out of their pockets as they go through the security checkpoint.

A number of news organizations have reported that their questions about what constitutes a “modified” pat down have gone unanswered by the T.S.A. The agency has said detailed descriptions will not be released for security reasons. (Motherlode has placed such a phone call and not received a response. When I do I will include it here.)

So how to prepare your child?

By matter of factly telling them that there will be big machines to walk through at the airport, and that a nice police officer might ask to pat their clothes to make sure they aren’t accidentally taking anything they shouldn’t onto the plane. The officer won’t hurt them, and, like a doctor, they are allowed to touch them even though they are strangers.

Then try to put the whole mess in perspective, and fly off and enjoy your holiday with people you love.

Lawmakers and residents engaged in heated debate Tuesday over a bill that would make random airport security pat-downs and body scans criminal in New Hampshire.

The bill (HB628-FN) "makes the touching or viewing with a technological device of a person’s breasts or genitals by a government security agent without probable cause a sexual assault,"according to the introductory text of the bill.

"Let's put their name on the sex offender registry, and maybe that will tell them New Hampshire means business," said bill co-sponsor Rep. Andrew Manuse, R-Derry.

"That is a crime in this state, and we should charge them every single time," said bill co-sponsor Rep. George Lambert, R-Litchfield.

It wasn't a large crowd in support of the bill, but the support was passionate. Concord's Darren Tapp said security procedures cost him a trip home for the holidays in December.

"This time, the news is talking about enhanced pat-downs," he said. "I cried on the phone with my mother that I did not wish to submit to enhanced pat-downs."

Transportation Security Administration officials would not comment on the proposed legislation except to say that security checkpoints are under federal jurisdiction. Some members of the Criminal Justice Committee said that it is a federal issue.

"We have to understand that if things need to be changed, they have to be done at the federal level, not the state level," said Rep. Laura Pantelakos, D-Portsmouth.

Some backers of the bill said TSA needs to do away with random screenings altogether and instead search only those passengers who look or act suspicious. But others said that would raise the problem of profiling.

Boston-Manchester Regional Airport does not have the controversial body scanners that can see through a person's clothes.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization - The PfP SOFA is a multilateral agreement between NATO member states and countries participating in the Partnership for Peace (PfP). It deals with the status of foreign forces while present on the territory of another state.

The agreement was originally drawn up in in Brussels on 19 June 1995 to facilitate cooperation and exercises under the recently launched PfP programme.

Basically, the PfP SOFA applies – with the necessary changes having been made – most of the provisions of an agreement between NATO member states, which was done in London on 19 June 1951. (Some provisions of this so-called NATO SOFA cannot be applied to Partner countries for technical reasons.)

It is important to note that these SOFAs fully respect the principle of territorial sovereignty, which requires a receiving state to give its consent to the entry of foreign forces. Neither the PfP SOFA nor the NATO SOFA addresses the issue of the presence of the force itself – that would be defined in separate arrangements. Consequently, it is only after states have agreed to send or receive forces that the SOFAs concerned are applicable.What does this mean in practice?

By acceding to the PfP SOFA, the parties to the agreement identify exactly what the status of their forces will be and what privileges, facilities and immunities will apply to them, when they are present on the territory of another state, which is party to the PfP SOFA. All states that are party to the agreement grant the same legal status to forces of the other parties when these are present on their territory.

Therefore, once there is a common agreement, for example, regarding a certain operation, training or exercise, the same set of provisions will apply on a reciprocal basis. A common status and an important degree of equal treatment will be reached, which will contribute to the equality between Partners.

In previous opinions we’ve discussed the possibility of US law enforcement and military assets being deployed to Main Street at the onset of any major crisis. Discussions by our comment contributors included all manner of thought on such a scenario, with arguments for and against the possibility that troops, police and private contractors would, if ordered to, fire on US citizens.

As we’ve seen in the middle east over the last several weeks, and are seeing in real time in Libya today, once military is deployed things can spiral out of control very quickly.

So while I can’t answer the title’s question for you I can offer my own opinion as to whether or not Americans will be fired upon. The short answer is that of course they will. Why would you think otherwise when US history offers up dozens of examples to choose from. The powers that be are ego maniacs, the elites have hundreds of years of experience controlling the masses, and the masses are mostly living their lives in denial. I consider it inevitable that when the uprisings begin and they turn really ugly that those who are paid to protect the powerful and their assets will follow orders and do precisely that.

Once again you can’t see this from your own point of view because you most likely won’t be the one holding the riot gear and facing the screaming mobs. While I’m certain some within the police, military and National Guard will follow their heart and refuse to fire or even follow orders if doing so means hurting their fellow citizens, in effect declaring conscientious objector status, they will for the most part be a small minority and will be quickly weeded out of the ranks by the second or third round of protests.

Considering the insanity the police and troops will be facing as well as the economic collapse that threatens them as well, the police/troops will rally around each other and protect their own closed community using whatever means necessary.Throw in the mercenaries, the agent provocateurs, the psyops campaigns, the meddling from the various intelligence agencies and the only question I have is not if but when and how much.

Someone in the comment section the other day said that since the military is now an all volunteer fighting force, the standard of conduct has been raised and no one in the military would ever fire on their fellow citizens. While I would love to believe this, I see it from a different point of view. Those in the military want(ed) to be in the military,thus they were more likely to buy into military groupthink and its attendant mind control and propaganda. Rest assured that long before any uniformed service person (police or military) is asked to confront their fellow citizens they will be subjected to a barrage of intensive conditioning and will be propagandized to the nth degree.

In my opinion, to believe that the various forces arrayed against the protesting public won’t fire on them is to continue to believe in American exceptionalism and more specifically in the desire of the rich and powerful to finally see the error of their ways and thus immediately cease and desist from further exploitation and pillage. If this is the case, if this is what you believe, then all I can say is that you live in a dream world Neo.

As with Libya and Bahrain, when the control infrastructure of the power elite is threatened, they will take whatever steps are necessary to maintain power.

Certainly, as mentioned, there will be those, likely in the tens of thousands, who will simply refuse orders and go home to take care of their families – after all, society would have to be falling apart if military personnel are being deployed. Likewise, however, there will be just as many, if not more, who simply have no clue that they are the pawns of Kings and Queens fighting to the death on the Grand Chessboard. When the order is given, they will gladly follow. Military planners are quite astute when it comes to these types of planning strategem, so it is quite likely that National Guard and other military units will be deployed cross-state, into areas where they will have no friends or family. The fact that you speak English will not matter.

The ultimate question of how far government policing intervention is willing to go remains to be seen. But given what we’ve seen throughout history, our recommendation is to simply stay home and get out of the way if at all possible, otherwise you risk the real possibility of being thrown into a refugee reeducation camp or worse.

What is the army getting ready for? Riots...where? When was the last time the US Army was called out for crowd control? Clearly the army is planning for something.

New ScientistFebruary 17, 2011

The US army is planning to field "rubber bullets" for machine guns. Military officials claim the ammunition will allow them to more effectively quell violent protests without loss of life,but human rights campaigners are alarmed by the new weapon.

[Editor's Note: The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits direct military involvement in civilian law enforcement, except “in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.” Constitutional authority gives the president and Congress the right to suspend Posse Comitatus during emergencies. Statutory exemptions, such as those encompassed by the Stafford Act 42 U.S.C §5122 and the Insurrection Act 10 U.S.C. § 331-333, permit active military law enforcement in situations that include, but are not limited to, threats of domestic insurrection and weapons of mass destruction.]

The final design for the XM1044 round has not been selected, according to an order placed on the Federal Business Opportunities website last month, but the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate has been working on a ring aerofoil projectile for some years. The round is a hollow plastic cylinder 40 millimetres across, looking something like a short toilet-paper roll. In flight its shape generates lift, giving it a longer range.

The army's existing crowd-control rounds are single shots fired from handheld grenade launchers with a range of about 50 metres -- the XM1044 would double this range. It would be supplied in belts for the Mk19 grenade launcher, a truck-mounted weapon that can fire almost six rounds per second. The Mk19 has been exported to some 30 countries, including Egypt.

"The US army has a requirement for a rapid-fire non-lethal capability," says Ken Schulters, project manager for close combat systems at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. "All currently fielded non-lethal ammunition is single shot."

Firing rapidly at long range is likely to be dangerously inaccurate, says Angela Wright of Amnesty International.

"Such a weapon system would allow for a burst of non-accurate fire at a crowd, with high risk of hitting bystanders, ricochets and of hitting vulnerable areas of the body," she says.

Despite being hollow and plastic, if a round were to strike someone in the head, it could severely injure or kill them, she adds.

~~~

Editor's Note: Mainstream media news reports on the eve of Thanksgiving, the busiest travel day of the year, show only a few people have complained about having to surrender their privacy and liberty to the TSA. This is just the beginning--expect the government to abuse your civil rights in every way imaginable as the paramilitary police state is expanded. As we can see from the reports above, Americans given power by the government to be overlords will have no problem using force against other Americans. Foreign troops and paid mercenaries could be brought in to assist in expanding the police state and enforcing marital law.

Grandma getting run over by a reindeer is not realistic, but this TSA Parody sung to its tune certainly is (warning: some of the lyrics are crude).

Those Who Desire to Give Up Freedom in Order to Gain Security Will Not Have, Nor Do They Deserve, Either One

"The secret societies were planning as far back as 1917 to invent an artificial threat... in order to bring humanity together in a one-world government which they call the New World Order." - William Cooper, "Behold A Pale Horse"

If people are scared of terrorism, financial chaos or global warming, they will be willing to cede their national sovereignty, freedom and liberties for global authority. - CFR Member and Former Secretary of State Richard N. Gardner, April 1974

A common creed among the Green Agenda activists has long been “order out of chaos.” They believe that people from all nations will literally beg for their New World Order if it can promise safety and security at a time when people feel under personal imminent threat. - The Green Agenda

"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin

"It is common observation here that our cause is the cause of all mankind, and we are fighting for their liberty in defending our own." - Benjamin Franklin

"To the American people I bid a fond farewell. Guard your liberties. It is the trust of each generation to pass a free republic to the next. And if I know you right, you will rouse yourself from slumber to ensure exactly that." - Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

"Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." - Michael Rivero

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

"No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation." - General Douglas MacArthur

"I know not what course others may take but as for me: give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

"The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people." - George Washington, in his First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." -- John Bradshaw

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." - Edward Abbey

"Government is not reason, and it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master: never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." - A popular Americanism of unknown origin, usually attributed to George Washington

"As soon as people drop the reins on government, government will leash the people." - James Bovard

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." - Bertrand de Jouvenal

The New World Order Plan is spiritually based: it is a conflict between God and His forces, on the one hand, and Satan and his demonic forces on the other side. Anyone who does not know Biblical doctrine about God and Satan, and who does not know Scriptural prophecy, cannot comprehend the nature of the struggle facing the world today. - David Bay, Cutting Edge Ministries

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. - Ephesians 6:12

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. - President John F. Kennedy, April 27, 1961

The Bible

Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

The book in which they are embodied was first published in the year 1897 by Philip Stepanov for private circulation among his intimate friends. The first time Nilus published them was in 1901 in a book called The Great Within the Small and reprinted in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum bearing the date of its reception, August 10, 1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed in the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Soviet land was a crime sufficient to ensure the owner's of being shot on sight. The fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuineness of the Protocols. The Jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.

Fair Use Notice

This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.